x/tools/gopls: v0.4.4 stops working after some period of time

[lakkiy]

gopls 0.4.4 consumes tons of memory!

And it killed my computer.

[mvdan]

You should provide some more detail. What Go version? What were you doing? How can the developers reproduce this issue?

[ainar-g]

Not the OP, but here are some of my measurements. Opening staticcheck source code and making a couple of edits, with v0.4.3:

$ ps -opid,cmd,rss,vsize -p $(pgrep gopls)
    PID CMD                           RSS    VSZ
  98049 gopls serve                 169016 1450036

Same things with v0.4.4:

$ ps -opid,cmd,rss,vsize -p $(pgrep gopls)
    PID CMD                           RSS    VSZ
  98956 gopls serve                 212648 1451360

I'm opening cmd/staticcheck/staticcheck.go on tag 2020.1.5, using Vim 8.1 with the natebosch/vim-lsc plugin.

UPD: Here are the numbers from the etcd repo:

# v0.4.3
$ ps -opid,cmd,rss,vsize -p $(pgrep gopls)
    PID CMD                           RSS    VSZ
 101854 gopls serve                 299244 1661956

# v0.4.4
$ ps -opid,cmd,rss,vsize -p $(pgrep gopls)
    PID CMD                           RSS    VSZ
 100923 gopls serve                 356384 1662964

[stamblerre]

@ainar-g: What is your workspace root when you open these files? Is it the module root or a subdirectory?

[ainar-g]

@stamblerre That doesn't seem to matter much. Using the same staticcheck example, launching Vim from the cmd/staticcheck subdir:

$ ps -opid,cmd,rss,vsize -p $(pgrep gopls)
    PID CMD                           RSS    VSZ
 234017 gopls serve                 225928 1519328

Launching Vim from project root:

$ ps -opid,cmd,rss,vsize -p $(pgrep gopls)
    PID CMD                           RSS    VSZ
 234276 gopls serve                 228060 1445404

[stamblerre]

The reason I ask is that gopls/v0.4.3 only loaded the packages in the directory you opened in the editor, whereas v0.4.4 loads the entire module, no matter which directory you open. I'm guessing that might be the cause of the increased memory usage you are seeing.

[ainar-g]

Can confirm, opening from the module root with v0.4.3 produces the same memory usage, so I guess my question is solved. Not sure about the OP's though.

[stamblerre]

Glad that resolved it!

@404CN: Please follow the steps in the troubleshooting guide and provide the relevant information so we can investigate.